<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2010 (2) TMI 1326 - MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=458160</link>
    <description>A BOT concession agreement granting possession of a project highway and the right to collect tolls for a fixed term was treated as a lease rather than a licence, because the substance of the transaction showed a transfer of the right to enjoy immovable property and not a mere personal permission. Stamp duty was therefore attracted under the Indian Stamp Act. The challenge to the amended toll-based charging entry and the related recovery provisions failed because the amendment was held only to prescribe duty for an existing category of lease, without enlarging the statutory definition or trespassing into the Union field. The writ petitions were dismissed and the stamp duty demand was sustained.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 11 Feb 2010 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 11 Oct 2024 12:42:36 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=772583" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2010 (2) TMI 1326 - MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=458160</link>
      <description>A BOT concession agreement granting possession of a project highway and the right to collect tolls for a fixed term was treated as a lease rather than a licence, because the substance of the transaction showed a transfer of the right to enjoy immovable property and not a mere personal permission. Stamp duty was therefore attracted under the Indian Stamp Act. The challenge to the amended toll-based charging entry and the related recovery provisions failed because the amendment was held only to prescribe duty for an existing category of lease, without enlarging the statutory definition or trespassing into the Union field. The writ petitions were dismissed and the stamp duty demand was sustained.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 11 Feb 2010 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=458160</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>